Flat Earth Society

If anyone thinks some of our members here are amongst the most adept in the world at ignoring evidence that's staring them in the face, try this lot:

Flat earth society forum.

Try the "Flat Earth Debate" section, and don't forget to read the FAQs.

Does anyone think they can actually prove that the earth is spherical? (Don't forget, your sources of information could all be part of a grand conspiracy).

So these are not just some Poe's like i once uppon a time thought creationist where.

I think some of them are serious, yes. Of course, the first question in the FAQs is the one I'd expect most people to ask: "Is this site a joke?"

It's a disc we live on apparently, by the way, so the concept doesn't seem to have to do with the biblical "four corners of the earth".

Flat earth society forum.

I always assumed that the Flat Earth Society was people having fun (tongue in cheek style). And then there's the Tiddlywinks club and the Duodecimal society. Oh, don't forget the Philadephia Procrastinators -- I'm not sure if you can call them a club, because they have not yet gotten around to naming themselves.

Does anyone think they can actually prove that the earth is spherical?

Well, of course it is not spherical.

Topologically, it is a sphere with handles. And every time a new clover-leaf highway interchange is built, we add more handles. There are also natural handles (natural bridges, caves with multiple openings).

Geometrically, it is not a sphere -- there are too many hills and valleys for that.

Of course, a lot of people do believe in a(n approximately) spherical earth for poor reasons. My father used to cite the fact that ships disappear over the horizon a little bit at a time - which indicates curvature but not necesarily a complete sphere.

There is no magic bullet that definitively proves a spherical earth; it's an accumulation of little bits of evidence. Like evolution, it's easy to argue against individual points but it's unreasonable to disregard the whole weight of evidence at once.

Does anyone think they can actually prove that the earth is spherical?

I wonder if Richard Branson could even convince them:

http://www.virgingalactic.com/

and don't forget to read the FAQs

They mention that the North Pole is the center of the disc and at the outer edge is an ice wall that corresponds to Antarctica. If they really cared to find out, they could measure the length of the circumference of Antarctica and figure out that its way to small to be the outer edge of the disc.

I still think it's mostly a Poe.

But I do find it really interesting how the likes of Mindspawn and Faith can continually create alternative realities to fit their beliefs then justify them with fragments of disjointed facts, science and invention. Simultaneously being both rational and hopelessly irrational.

These people aren't stupid - which you'd expect from people with such screwed up ideas - in fact they are pretty damn smart. Deluded isn't really a big enough word for what they are.

Not so long ago I had a 3 year debate with a guy that didn't believe in evolution. He had a PhD in astro physics, but he was totally irrational when it came to evolution. He eventually accepted it, but it wasn't as a result of the argument, it was because he visited Cambridge University (UK) and got to speak to a few high end biologists that were also Christians.

They explained that his position was scientifically untenable but also that it wasn't a problem for his other beliefs.

He wasn't persuaded by argument, he was persuaded by peer pressure. An interesting phenomenon.

He wasn't persuaded by argument, he was persuaded by peer pressure. An interesting phenomenon.

It was peer pressure that persuaded then to oppose evolution. So it is no surprise that peer pressure can also work the other way.

quote:

---

As seen in the diagrams above, the earth is in the form of a disk with the North Pole in the center and Antarctica as a wall around the edge. This is the generally accepted model among members of the society. In this model, circumnavigation is performed by moving in a great circle around the North Pole.

The earth is surrounded on all sides by an ice wall that holds the oceans back. This ice wall is what explorers have named Antarctica. Beyond the ice wall is a topic of great interest to the Flat Earth Society. To our knowledge, no one has been very far past the ice wall and returned to tell of their journey. What we do know is that it encircles the earth and serves to hold in our oceans and helps protect us from whatever lies beyond.

Here is picture of a proposed, but certainly not definitive, flat earth:

---

this seems like a claim with easily tested prediction: circumnavigation near the antarctic should be significantly longer than circumnavigation near the arctic.

arachnophilia writes: near the antarctic should be significantly longer than circumnavigation near the arctic.

But you would be measuring the times of voyages making "round earth" assumptions. For example, the standard round earth view of the sun is completely different from the flat earth model, so it cannot be used as a basis for any units of time. And if human devices like clocks (based on R.E. solar assumptions anyway) appear to show a short time for a voyage close to the ice wall, this could be accounted for by the rim-proximity time warp hypothesis, which is part of the model of some flat earthers.

Does anyone think they can actually prove that the earth is spherical?

I don't see how we could have day and night at the same time on the same side of a disc. Their spotlight explanation falls a little flat.

ProtoTypical writes: I don't see how we could have day and night at the same time on the same side of a disc. Their spotlight explanation falls a little flat.

Something in me hopes the pun was intended.

But seriously, optical illusions have to be taken into account, as they are demonstrably common. Here's a discussion on apparent sunrise and sunset you might enjoy.

Sunrise/sunset

Third post:

quote:

---

The sunrise/sunset is an optical illusion brought on by an opaque atmolayer and refraction.

---

There you have it. Prove him wrong.

arachnophilia writes: near the antarctic should be significantly longer than circumnavigation near the arctic. But you would be measuring the times of voyages making "round earth" assumptions.

You could use stakes as markers to determine when you went around once and then figure up the distance you traveled (maybe with a really long wire) and see that its way too short to be the outer edge of the disc.

the rim-proximity time warp hypothesis

Heh, they should have a rim-proximity space warp hypothesis where as you approach the outer edge of the disc, space is warped back around towards itself to a centralized point directly underneath the north pole.

Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.

C.S. writes: You could use stakes as markers to determine when you went around once and then figure up the distance you traveled (maybe with a really long wire) and see that its way too short to be the outer edge of the disc.

It's often been noted by the society that round earthers will suggest what they think would be experiments which would falsify a flat earth, but that they seem to lack the confidence to actually go out and do them.

Heh, they should have a rim-proximity space warp hypothesis where as you approach the outer edge of the disc, space is warped back around towards itself to a centralized point directly underneath the north pole.

We do. We also have a "staked wire distortion hypothesis" which would render your suggested experiment above futile.

Along with all that, we have a healthy "the burden of proof is on you" attitude*, based on the obvious point that the earth being flat is the intuitive default position (otherwise we would fall off).

*Sometimes known colloquially as "the mindspawn stance".

Heh, they should have a rim-proximity space warp hypothesis where as you approach the outer edge of the disc, space is warped back around towards itself to a centralized point directly underneath the north pole. We do.

Nice. So its flat, its just that everything is distorted to make it look like a sphere. Truly inarguable.

We also have a "staked wire distortion hypothesis" which would render your suggested experiment above futile.

Do you have a link to that hypothesis? I couldn't find it through google.